No Way Out?

[jayleew]

Like so many, I get tired of repeating myself, but here we go:

Superluminal:

The issue of free will is not as difficult as some try to make it. My understanding of the whole thing is that we cannot know if God is omniscient or not, in fact there are cases in the Bible where one could easily say that God changes his mind because of something someone said. If God was omniscient and knew that he would change his mind, it doesn't make any sense to even go that route. I mean, why go through with the charade if you know you are just going to change your mind anyway?

Clearly our Bible teaches us that God knows all hearts. You are correct that if he was omniscient, we would not have free will.

The only sense that I can make of it is that God knows our hearts through some telepathic ability. By knowing our current state of heart, he can logically deduce what decision we will make given any situation. And, since we are told that he is in all hearts, we can say that he can logically put together all the decisions that everyone would make and where the world will end up given that instant in time's data.

So, we make the choices, and God tells us where we will end up if nothing changes from its current state. I would think a being of superior intellect could perform such a feat by knowing where everyone stands.

This may or may not be the case, but at least it makes sense. And it doesn't make sense to say that God is omniscient given that he changes his mind.

 

[gOn]

I see no problem with free will. If God can do everything, He can not Know everything, and at the same time Know everything... lol

 

[superluminal]

jayleew,

I have read your position before so you did not have to repeat yourself.

Clearly our Bible teaches us that God knows all hearts. You are correct that if he was omniscient, we would not have free will.

This (omniscience and omnipotence) is the claim of christians, and the whole purpose of this thread.

The only sense that I can make of it is that God knows our hearts through some telepathic ability. By knowing our current state of heart, he can logically deduce what decision we will make given any situation. And, since we are told that he is in all hearts, we can say that he can logically put together all the decisions that everyone would make and where the world will end up given that instant in time's data.

So, we make the choices, and God tells us where we will end up if nothing changes from its current state. I would think a being of superior intellect could perform such a feat by knowing where everyone stands.

This is mysticism and rationalization, not a christian point of view. It directly implies that god is at the mercy of our collective decisions and is therefore not omnicient or omnipotent.

This may or may not be the case, but at least it makes sense.

Not if you are a christian. The god of the bible is omnicient and omnipotent. If he is not both of these things, then he is fallible.

And it doesn't make sense to say that God is omniscient given that he changes his mind.

I couldn't agree more.

 

[gOn]

How can God, an Eternal and perfect Being change anything in himself?

 

[jayleew]

jayleew,

I have read your position before so you did not have to repeat yourself.

Sorry, but I have come a little ways out of my arrogance.

This (omniscience and omnipotence) is the claim of christians, and the whole purpose of this thread.

This is mysticism and rationalization, not a christian point of view. It directly implies that god is at the mercy of our collective decisions and is therefore not omnicient or omnipotent.

If that is true, then I am proudly not a Christian, but I follow Christ's teachings and he never said that God is omnicient. If I am wrong, will a Christian please correct me?

What do you mean by, "at the mercy of our decisions"?
If he gives free will, he can take it away as easily, for the benefit of Godself.

Not if you are a christian. The god of the bible is omnicient and omnipotent. If he is not both of these things, then he is fallible.

I guess I don't read the Bible enough, because I missed the part where it says that God is omnicient.

 

[superluminal]

Jayleew,

If christians feel that god is not both omnipotent and omniscient, then I've really missed the boat.

The whole purpose of this thread is to refute the contradictory stance of a god who is infallible (omnipotent and omniscient) yet allows true free will, as all of the christians that I know of, claim.

Yes?

 

[jayleew]

Jayleew,

If christians feel that god is not both omnipotent and omniscient, then I've really missed the boat.

The whole purpose of this thread is to refute the contradictory stance of a god who is infallible (omnipotent and omniscient) yet allows true free will, as all of the christians that I know of, claim.

Yes?

Well if that is the purpose of this thread then, as a Christ follower, I cannot deny the logic you state as it stands. But, your premise that God is omniscient remains to be shown. Or, at least, that Christians do think God is omniscient. Is this a stereotype that Christians have created of themselves and assumed as true to make themselves feel better? Any Christian who says God is omniscient and that we have free will is illogical.

Christians: If it says so in the Bible that God is omnicient, then we need to ask questions. I know I will be asking.

 

[ApatheticUSA]

I believe everyone has a purpose in life such as working on a farm to feed others...But also I dont believe that its a plan by god to so, people are supposed to have free will according to christianity, then how is there such a plan?

 

[ellion]

i notice that there is a sticking point with free will, that is, some feel that if free will is not exercised 100% of situations then free will does not exist.
in comparison a person may have a sense of humour but not use this sense of humour 100% of situations, does this mean he has no sense of humour?

 

[ellion]

this topic has been done in the thread "free will"

 

[superluminal]

Yes ellion. This is not about free will per se. It's about the absurdity of the notion of a god who would create fully autonomous beings and then torture them horribly for exercising that autonomy.

This god is either evil or fallible.

Let's just suppose that the christian god exists and we all know it for a fact. I choose to not follow his stupid rules and become a rebel golden calf worshipper and tell god to basically go screw himself. Otherwise, I live a normal, typical life.

Of course, I'm going to hell. So, even under these circumstances, does this not make god evil?

Again, you defy your parents, so they torture you for the rest of your life in a dungeon under the house. Evil. Sick. Worthy of contempt.

I find the christian concept of god to be evil, sick, and worthy of contempt and nothing more than a ruse perpetrated by sick minds to gain control over weak minds.

 

[jayleew]

Let's just suppose that the christian god exists and we all know it for a fact. I choose to not follow his stupid rules and become a rebel golden calf worshipper and tell god to basically go screw himself. Otherwise, I live a normal, typical life.

Of course, I'm going to hell. So, even under these circumstances, does this not make god evil?

Again, you defy your parents, so they torture you for the rest of your life in a dungeon under the house. Evil. Sick. Worthy of contempt.

I find the christian concept of god to be evil, sick, and worthy of contempt and nothing more than a ruse perpetrated by sick minds to gain control over weak minds.

That is rediculous. It is a crime to commit murder and if you do, you go to jail. So, it is evil, sick, and worthy of contempt to follow through with established law that says if you murder you will go to jail? Whose fault was it that lands a person in jail? The government's fault for keeping the law?

Sure, it is sick for parents to torture a rebellious child. Is that because the law does not deem rebelling against the parents as an evil act? It is bad to curse your parents. But, it is not we who should be vigilantes and take God's judgement. God made the law that if you sin and repent not of it, you go to hell. If you choose not to repent, who is throwing you in the lake of fire? By not repenting, are you contributing to your own demise? Who condems you? Isn't it yourself? It would be evil if God let sinful man dwell with saints in heaven. That is like letting a serial killer loose among law-abiding citizens. God is the jailer and will carry out the law set forth. If you are a habitual law breaker, where would you be in this society?

 

[ellion]

This is not about free will per se. It's about the absurdity of the notion of a god who would create fully autonomous beings and then torture them horribly for exercising that autonomy.

This god is either evil or fallible.

Let's just suppose that the christian god exists and we all know it for a fact. I choose to not follow his stupid rules and become a rebel golden calf worshipper and tell god to basically go screw himself. Otherwise, I live a normal, typical life.

Of course, I'm going to hell. So, even under these circumstances, does this not make god evil?

Again, you defy your parents, so they torture you for the rest of your life in a dungeon under the house. Evil. Sick. Worthy of contempt.

I find the christian concept of god to be evil, sick, and worthy of contempt and nothing more than a ruse perpetrated by sick minds to gain control over weak minds.

wholeheartedly agree.
but the scales need to be balanced.

 

[SVRP]

SVRP: I've noticed that you've replied selectively, why? are some of the questions, impossible for you to refute.

No, not really. They are really very fundamental.
Unfortunately my business keeps me away and access to a computer is not always possible. I hope you understand.

when?

When man was created.

when?

When man decided to disobey God and acted upon it.

 

[SVRP]

That is rediculous. It is a crime to commit murder and if you do, you go to jail. So, it is evil, sick, and worthy of contempt to follow through with established law that says if you murder you will go to jail? Whose fault was it that lands a person in jail? The government's fault for keeping the law?

Sure, it is sick for parents to torture a rebellious child. Is that because the law does not deem rebelling against the parents as an evil act? It is bad to curse your parents. But, it is not we who should be vigilantes and take God's judgement. God made the law that if you sin and repent not of it, you go to hell. If you choose not to repent, who is throwing you in the lake of fire? By not repenting, are you contributing to your own demise? Who condems you? Isn't it yourself? It would be evil if God let sinful man dwell with saints in heaven. That is like letting a serial killer loose among law-abiding citizens. God is the jailer and will carry out the law set forth. If you are a habitual law breaker, where would you be in this society?

Very good points to consider, jayleew.

 

[SVRP]

The conundrum - God is evil or He does not exist.

Postulate 1: God cannot be suprised by our decisions.
Therefore, if god is ever suprised by anything we do, he is fallible. So we accept postulate 1 and it's consequences. God knows what we will decide because he is not fallible.

If there is a God who created us then this postulate will stand since He knows everything about us.
The statement that God is infallible from the consequences of postulate 1 is an assumption since an omniscient God will know the results of our decisions but does not make our decisions. But since He knows who we are and our heart’s intentions then it is likely He will know what we will decide. Conclusion – the assumption stands.

I have honestly investigated and found it to be nonsense, blurred further by 2000 years of human interpretation and innacuracy. And yes, it is my choice but god is not suprised.

So, god knows for certain, the results of my investigation, for he cannot be suprised.

The presence of Jesus has no effect on the outcome, and is irrelevant. The fact is, I have investigated, and come to my conclusion. God cannot be suprised.

These statements assume that there are 2000 years of human interpretation in the Bible. If something did exist within them whether they were God-led, God-ordained, or God-inspired, these statements conclude it is inaccurate and found to be nonsense. Jesus is irrelevant. Therefore anything within them will be throw out and should not contribute to the end conclusion. If God exists then He should not be surprised. Conclusion – Anything related to Jesus is thrown out, but the statements do not tell us of God’s character other than He is knowledgeable.

God knows I am an atheist, he knows why, and is not suprised. And I will go to hell for eternity.

This statement does not give any insight to God’s character. Being knowledgeable of a person’s atheism does not conclude God’s character as being evil. Assuming the person is going to hell because he is an atheist is inconsistent with previous statements. It is assuming an action by God when the character of God has been undetermined. Plus there is an assumption there is a hell and an eternity, which has also been undetermined. And the statement, “I will go to hell for eternity”, must be thrown out since it can be derived that Jesus taught about an eternal hell. Conclusion – The faulty assumption of going to hell is inconsistent with previous statements since anything related to Jesus is considered irrelevant. The argument falls apart here, and the statement does not contribute to God’s character other than He is knowledgeable.

Therefore I conclude that god is evil.

Inconsistent to the above statements. The conclusion is faulty.
Therefore, the conundrum should be – Either God exists or He doesn’t.

 

[superluminal]

Can someone else point out the five thousand errors of logic and interpretation in SVRP's post above, please? My head hurts and I need to go sacrifice a goat to appease my god of head pain.

 

[SVRP]

Can someone else point out the five thousand errors of logic and interpretation in SVRP's post above, please? My head hurts and I need to go sacrifice a goat to appease my god of head pain.

Are you appealing to someone else to explain the logic in your statements? Why are you doing that? Weren’t you the one who placed a challenge to “theists”? Can't you continue the debate, superluminal? If not then the correct conundrum is God exists or He doesn’t.

 

[superluminal]

SVRP:

If not then the correct conundrum is God exists or He doesn’t.

Look. I set the premise that god exists as stated by christians and went from there.

The premise was: If god exists and is omniscient and omnipotent then he knows I'm an atheist and why and still will burn me in hell therefore god (assuming he exists with attributes as stated) is completely, utterly evil.

I'm tired of this anyway. I know there's no god(s) so it dosen't matter. Have fun.

 

[antifreeze]

super-man,

1. why no freewill? if you put a rat in a maze, you control where the rat can go. no matter if the rat decides to turn left or right at point B or point C, eventually, that rat will end up at the end of the maze. the maze is god's plan, you are the rat [no offense], and "freewill" is your ability to make choices as you proceed through the maze.

2. you cannot call god evil. god is the fountainhead of morals, who are you to question "Him"?

3. finally, and most importantly, religion is based on faith, and you cannot "convert" the faithful with logic. but...live and learn. at the least, i admire your quest.

cheers.